Quote:
|
Originally Posted by shadow
Oh usually I try and see where my strategy has holes. And then usually I thoroughly investigate this based on past chart data(manual backtesting I guess?). Of course since the past doesn't necessarily determine the future, I look for common themes in each trade, from this I see if I can upgrade my system. I was just wondering if you did anything like this but apparently you look at it a different way, but you don't look at charts at all right. It's alright, your style doesn't pertain to mine, so I think It's going to be difficult to explain. Could you tell me this though did you calculate it through probabilities? Thanks eh. I sent this message earlier, sorry if there is two in your inbox!
|
I think I understand now. You want to know is how I upgraded the trade style. That I believe is done differently depending on the trade style being upgraded.
Trade styles have two parts. (generally speaking)
The first part is what is working. I did more of this. What I mean is, I took what was working and reconfigured it a couple of different ways. Some worked better and some didn't. Of course, I used what worked better the best.
The second part is what is not working, or not working very well. Try to remove this completely. That may not be possible. So find a way to reduce this part as much as possible. Or get it to work at least a little.
If you use a trade style that you like (or develop one yourself) and learn what makes it tick. I mean study and know it very well. After upgrading it a few times, you will have a most impressive out come.
I did not do this through back testing or past information. I know this trade style very well. I know that the wealthy (billionaires) trade differently that we do. I get a modest 100% ROI during good market conditions. They do much better. The gap between a day job and millionaire looks big, but the gap between millionaire and billionaire is HUGE. I must keep upgrading if I'm ever going to get there.
Now maybe I'm silly and I still don't understand what the question is. The first reply was so far off that you didn't even know I had replied. The reason I used it out here is because (if I answered this correctly) you are not the only person with this question. A few of you asked (in PM's) and so if a few that are asking have the question, then many who are not asking have the question.